Anything that's flying high will come down at some point. Expectations by analysts seemed increasingly to be decoupled from reality.

Actually, the analysts usually low-ball a little bit.

Apple repeatedly sandbags its expected earnings -- by almost 16% on average. Analysts know this, so they typically predict a little above it, but still below the actual results.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CR

If Apple encounters such problems launching a TV service just in the US...

They already have a service, via iTunes and AppleTV. You can rent movies or get a "season pass" on certain TV shows. AppleTV also includes Netflix and Hulu; adding more services would be (technically) easy.

They already have a service, via iTunes and AppleTV. You can rent movies or get a "season pass" on certain TV shows. AppleTV also includes Netflix and Hulu; adding more services would be (technically) easy.

Doesn't seem to get many people excited, otherwise there wouldn't be all these rumors about Apple's TV plans.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wizwor

When Blu-ray and HDDVD were competing to succeed the DVD, Sony AGAIN refused to accommodate the adult entertainment industry.

Doesn't seem to have been the decisive factor this time. The porn industry seems to be happy enough with the DVD. Anyway, an Apple TV with integrated services would probably be much more locked down than a standalone Bluray player.

They already have a service, via iTunes and AppleTV. You can rent movies or get a "season pass" on certain TV shows. AppleTV also includes Netflix and Hulu; adding more services would be (technically) easy.

That kind of service, *everybody* has. Even Walmart.
Which is why Apple TV is a "hobby" and not a core revenue generator.

What the analysts are pining for is something "different" and "insanely great!" that will leave everybody else in the dust.
Which is why they keep waiting... waiting... and waiting...

I'm probably the one hoping they come into the TV space, more than anything they've said themselves. Apple TV has indeed only been a hobby for them. I just see the huge potential because the TV market is so fragmented yet enormous. I laughed along with Steve Ballmer when Apple announced they were getting into phones.

I just don't see that many other consumer devices that have the economic upside of TV that they can expand into. Game systems? Cars? Washer/Dryer/Fridges? Those all don't feel as right as TV to me. But hey, y'all could be right and this is the start of endless contraction for Apple, from growth to stable income. They better raise their dividend if that happens, lol.

fjtorres
That kind of service, *everybody* has. Even Walmart.
Which is why Apple TV is a "hobby" and not a core revenue generator.

What the analysts are pining for is something "different" and "insanely great!" that will leave everybody else in the dust.
Which is why they keep waiting... waiting... and waiting

Quote:

Originally Posted by HansTWN

They are also looking for new designs for the ipad and iphone --- renaming version 4XS version 5 just doesn't cut it. They are rehashing same old with marginal changes.

new, different, great, insane!

The only thing I can think of is "holographic" displays or expandable displays. That might be enough.

We actually have a pretty complete technology.
Great color, great resolution, great speed, great sound.
Sure you can tweak it and get 110% or even 120% great, but not all that much change as far as what you see or hear.

The waiting, waiting, will go on for a while.

Of course I could carry on about more battery and more memory but no on seems to care about that.

We actually have a pretty complete technology.
Great color, great resolution, great speed, great sound.

That is a little bit unfair. New, different, great design does make sense. Even if the technology stays the same. If you look at TVs for example, the same model does get updated. When I bought my 46" Samsung I seen the old model and the brand new model. The price of the old model was lower, even though it had almost identical specs. So I asked, what the difference was? This one is a new design, see here it has a new see-through edge and it got 4 instead of 3 hdmi-in . Needless to say, I picked the old model - got knocked off another 20% because the only one left was the display model. Most people must see - ohhhhh, it so more shiny than last years, must be better too. Come on, it is just a TV. Hook up bd-player and cable box to both tv and sound system, hit play, boom good sound and picture.

Now for Apple it is different. They make such a big deal out of a new model, everybody expects it to be better too technology wise. They can't just say: oh, it is just a new design with more rounded edges (pun intended) to be able to hold it better. What? Did they screw up the first time around?

It would have to be a pretty amazing television to support the high profit margins Apple is accustomed to. It's a very crowded field with established players. The last 'amazing' television was the Kuro and people were not willing to pay the premium.

If amazing means gesturing towards the tv, Microsoft probably has a leg up with Kinect.

I don't see Apple doing this, but Netflix or Prime plus Aereo would be an amazing alternative to cable/satellite -- finally realize the potential of internet tv.

Worse, the best components are captive production for vertically integrated companies and what's available to second-tier vendors is second-class/older tech. Which is great stuff but hardly what you can charge premium prices for.

So forget distinctive hardware.

Distinctive content has already been discussed. Everybody has access to te same streaming channels, the same movies and TV shows, and few if any content owners are going to give anybody exclusivity. So unless Apple buys a movie studio or starts one up (like Amazon) they'll be peddling the exact same content anybody else can peddle.

Distinctive software?
Well, sure. That would work.
*If* they can come up with something Microsoft isn't doing, or Sony, or Google, or DirecTV, or Dish, or Roku, or Slingbox... And each of those has a calling card and a user base all their own, not just a brand.

TV is a *mature* business.
And the existing players are well-entrenched with deep installed bases.
So coming in and muscling aside a hundred players, dozens of which have deep resources, isn't the same as cornering the market for 2.5in hard drives for a year to muscle aside Diamond and Creative.

Getting into the TV business today is getting into a cutthroat low-margin dogfight.
It chewed up Intel. It trampled HP. Most display vendors are losing their shirts.

For Apple to get into TV they have to wait for something to disrupt the living room marketplace and open the door to new approaches and business models. (Which is what Microsoft did... six years ago.)

Or, they could go and outright buy one of the industry technology leaders.
They have the money.
And it so happens that one of the top players in LCD tech is in dire straights because of poor marketting: Sharp.

My guess is that if Apple really wants in to the TV business *this year* they're going to have to buy their way in. And it won't be cheap. Probably a net loss for a few years, too.

There's lots of reasons why an Apple HDTV hasn't happened and they are still as valid this year as last. Next year may be different; Japan will start limited ultraHD (4k) broadcasting in 2014 and will begin testing 8k super ultraHD in 2016 so maybe around 2016-2020 a window might open for new players.

But not now.
The "analysts" may not be looking at reality but Apple apparently is.
And staying the heck out is the wise move.